On April 30th of 2008, the United States Senate proclaimed John McCain eligible to become the President of the United States, passing by unanimous consent Senate Resolution 511 which stated that his birth in the Panama Canal Zone did not violate the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution.

One of the co-sponsors of this non-binding resolution was Barack Hussein Obama.

Though the Constitution does not define natural born, it is clear that the meaning had been based upon principles included in a work quite popular with many of the Founders, the 1758 Law of Nations by Frenchman Emerich de Vattel

According to the Law of Nations, the natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens 

So because of his birth in a Panama hospital, embarrassing questions were being raised about McCains Constitutional eligibility to serve

Nevertheless, rather than adhere to the text and spirit of the Constitution and engage in honest debate, members of the imperial senate rushed to put the issue to rest by ignoring the language of the document to which they had sworn a solemn oath of allegiance.

And the true motive for this betrayal of trust is more disgraceful than the betrayal itself.

For it was quietly hoped this cynical, bipartisan resolution proclaiming McCains eligibility might insure no question would arise about another candidate, one who was clearly and irretrievably ineligible for the highest office in the land.

Though the Constitution does not define natural born, it is clear that the meaning had been based upon principles included in a work quite popular with many of the Founders, the 1758 Law of Nations by Frenchman Emerich de Vattel

So the constitution "says so," even though it actually doesn't.

Sorry, this "natural born" charade is still just a bunch of folks grasping at straws. They're hoping to find a magic way to remove Obama that doesn't involve actual work.

It’s quite clear, if you do the work, what the founders did and why.
Of course the founders were very smart and todays citizens are too lazy to seek the truth, and too often let the courts have the final say.
I believe nbc is so obvious the google even pulled references to nbc.
they be scared

They're hoping to find a magic way to remove Obama that doesn't involve actual work.

I emphatically disagree. I would not accuse a tenth of the people on this board of avoiding work. That demographic just doesn't fit well around here.

As much as I would love to have Obama removed from office for being ineligible, that is such a short term goal it barely deserves mention. There are far greater gambits in this game.

The first long term goal is to stem the slippery slide of the Constitution into irrelevancy. We know it's sliding (gun rights, speech rights, property rights). Where does it stop? Article II is on the line here; it is time to take a stand. And the second long term goal is to establish legal precedent whereby the damage Obama has done to the nation can be undone without further legal machinations. If he is labeled ineligible, all of his law, appointments, executive orders, everything, can be placed on the chopping block for review. That is priceless.

[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen. -- Rep. John Bingham (author of the 14th Amendment) 1866

9
posted on 06/03/2011 11:07:01 AM PDT
by so_real
( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")

many words and phrases used in the Constitution are not defined in the document itself, as they were in common use.

“natural born citizen” being one of them

tens of millions of US citizens have demanded the eligibility issue be addressed properly... which started 6 months or more before zer0 was in office. instead it’s being ignored and swept under the carpet.

if we’re ignoring the Constitution then we should ignore it.

including amendment 16

10
posted on 06/03/2011 11:20:50 AM PDT
by sten
(fighting tyranny never goes out of style)

We live in an age where Bill Clinton can quibble about the meaning of the word “is” while giving a sworn deposition. You don’t think that Barak Obama & his voters can’t tap-dance their way out of this?

11
posted on 06/03/2011 11:25:14 AM PDT
by Tallguy
(Received a fine from the NFL for a helmet-to-helmet hit.)

The cynic in me thinks that maybe, just maybe, Obama’s own supporters might ultimately use “eligibility” as the reason to get rid of him when the democrat party faces total collapse. As a group they are very practical when it comes to their survival.

12
posted on 06/03/2011 11:28:09 AM PDT
by Tallguy
(Received a fine from the NFL for a helmet-to-helmet hit.)

Somehow your opinion does not carry the same weight as that of Chief Justice John Marshall, Justice Livingston and Justice Joseph Story not to mention St. George Tucker, Daniel Ramsay and a host of others close to the event, as you are not? Do you really think that your opinioo has greater authority than theirs or do you just get rewarded for ignoratn attacks?

16
posted on 06/03/2011 2:24:26 PM PDT
by AmericanVictory
(Should we be more like them or they more like we used to be?)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.